Celebrating Dr.Martin Luther King, Jr. and Religious Freedom

MLK1Martin Luther King, Jr. Believed in Theocracy

by Gary DeMar

If you want to attack Christian conservatives who believe that Christians have an obligation to impact the world, even the world of politics, you will hear hysterical cries from “the Left” on how such a view is theocratic. According to the secular left, Christianity and politics in America mix as well as Islam and politics mix in Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan.MLK3

[Somehow] Liberals can never be accused of being theocratic because their worldview is unquestionably right. All competing worldviews must be measured against the standard of Liberalism. There is an exception, however. The Black community has been able to use “theocratic language” without being described as theocratic.

In celebration of Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday, [a decade ago] The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC) offered a half-page editorial on how “King’s message still resonates.”1 Consider the following:

“As those who seek a better life continue flocking to our shores, King’s philosophy—rooted in his abiding Christian faith—offers a more encompassing spiritual view than that advanced by xenophobes and others who would vainly cloak themselves in a mantle of self-righteousness.”

MLK2King’s “abiding Christian faith” is acceptable to the leftist elitists because they get to define what it means to them. The editors of the AJC would never apply a Bible-believing minister’s “abiding Christian faith” to abortion. That would be imposing morality on others in an area that does not fit the “Progressive” (Liberal) agenda. Such a declaration would be theocratic.MLK4

In a college address, King said, “God is not interested merely in the freedom of black men and brown and yellow men, but God is interested in the freedom of the whole human race and the creation of a society where all men will live together as brothers, and every man will respect the dignity and the worth of human personality.” How can the editors of the AJC write this when a number of them care nothing for the worth of the human personality of unborn children? What hypocrisy! King died in 1968, five years before the Roe v. Wade decision. I wonder what he would have thought of the decision knowing that a disproportionate number of black babies have been aborted in the name of “civil rights”? Black Genocide is its given name.2

In his famous “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” written during his imprisonment in 1963, King wrote: “The church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society.”

You can easily imagine the editorial that would have been written if James Dobson had said the same thing as King at any of the three Justice Sundays that have been held around the nation; (i.e.), “Apparently Dr. Dobson has not read the Constitution. . . . Doesn’t he know that there is a separation between Church and State? . . . He’s calling for a theocracy…” (yada-yada-yada).

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., believed that it was OK to impose God’s view of morality on society. Given the modern definition of theocracy, this makes him a theocrat. Liberals nod their heads in agreement like mindless “Bobble-Head dolls” when they quote him without ever noting their own hypocrisy.

Here are some other quotes by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.:

“I still believe that standing up for the truth of God is the greatest thing in the world. This is the end of life. The end of life is not to be happy. The end of life is not to achieve pleasure and avoid pain. The end of life is to do the will of God, come what may.”3

“We will win our freedom because the sacred heritage of our nation and the eternal will of God are embodied in our echoing demands.”4

“Seems that I can hear God saying that it’s time to rise up now and make it clear that the evils of the universe must be removed. And that God isn’t going to do all of it by himself. The church that overlooks this is a dangerously irrelevant church.”5

“The church must also become increasingly active in social action outside its doors. . . . It must exert its influence in the area of economic justice. As guardian of the moral and spiritual life of a community the church cannot look with indifference upon these glaring evils.”6

“If one is truly devoted to the religion of Jesus he will seek to rid the earth of social evils. The gospel is social as well as personal.”7

“As Christians we owe our ultimate allegiance to God and His will, rather than to man and his folkways.”8

“Any religion which professes to be concerned about the souls of men and is not concerned about the social and economic conditions that scar the soul, is a spiritually moribund religion only waiting for the day to be buried.”9

Put these same words by Dr. Martin Luther King in the mouth of a Tea Party member today and the Left will scream “intolerance,” “keep religion out of politics,” and “you can’t impose your morality on others.”

The civil rights movement of the 1960s was influenced by those who brought morality to bear on issues related to race and equality. “For the first time in history, a single Protestant-Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Jewish testimony was presented to Congress in support of legislation. Congress became aware that the religious community was aroused in a startling way. The participation of the religious groups in the March on Washington was another bit of evidence. Over 40,000 white church people participated in the March.”10 With just a few changes, this description of the 1964 March on Washington could easily describe the activities of the often vilified “religious right” and their efforts to influence legislation. The similarities are not lost on Stephen L. Carter, William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law at Yale University and one of the nation’s leading experts on constitutional law:

Religious organizations were among the strongest supporters of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlawed discrimination in employment and public accommodations. They testified in support of it. They made public appeals for it. And, once again, only the segregation[ist]s complained. Senator Richard Russell of Georgia charged that those who made religious arguments in favor of the legislation did not understand “the proper place of religious leaders in our national life,” adding that the religions should not “make a moral question of a political issue.” Indeed, there is little about the civil rights movement, other than the vital distinction in the ends that it sought, that makes it very different from the right‑wing religious movements of the present day.11

Civil rights legislation was passed in the early 1960s because the “moral question” was pressed by religious leaders. “When it was finally passed, friend and foe alike credited the passage of the bill to the persistent power of the church.”12 Hubert H. Humphrey, the leader of the struggle in the Senate for passage, along with other veteran fighters for civil rights legislation, “insisted that the churches’ efforts had made the difference which had been lacking in other struggles for such bills.13

“Cowardice asks the question, is it safe? Expediency asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? But, conscience asks the question, is it right? And there comes a time when we must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but one must take it because it is right.”  (Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.)             Now is that time. Enough said.



[1] “In ’06, King’s message still resonates,” The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (January 16, 2006), A14.
[2] http://www.blackgenocide.org

[3] From a sermon preached in November 1956. Quoted by William J. Bennett, from the Foreword to Ralph Reed’s Politically Incorrect: The Emerging “Faith Factor” in American Politics (Dallas, TX: Word, 1994), xiii.

[4] Quoted in Taylor Branch, Parting the Waters: America in the King Years, 1954B63 (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1988), 743.

[5] Quoted in Branch, Parting the Waters, 696.

[6] King, Stride Toward Freedom, 208.

[7] Martin Luther King, Jr., Stride Toward Freedom (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1986), 117.

[8] King, Stride Toward Freedom, 117.

[9] King, Stride Toward Freedom, 91.

[10] Robert W. Spike, The Freedom Revolution and the Churches (New York: Association Press, 1965), 106.

[11] Stephen L. Carter, The Culture of Disbelief: How American Law and Politics Trivialize Religious Devotion (New York: Basic Books, 1993), 228.

[12] Spike, The Freedom Revolution and the Churches, 108.

[13] Spike, The Freedom Revolution and the Churches, 108.


Article from americanvision.org.

This article from American Vision is a combination of two articles (1) “Martin Luther King, Jr., Believed in Theocracy;” and (2) “Driving the Left and Right Crazy.”



This entry was posted in All-Encompassing Gospel, Church and State, Theology/Philosophy, Worldview/Culture, X-Americana, Z-Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Thank you for your interest and comment.

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s